Inclusive Learning and Educational Equity 5

5.3 Changes in Teachers’ and Students’ Perception 
and Reflection in Teaching–Learning Process of Inclusive 
Education by Implementation of the UDL Approach
The results of the research can be summarised by a statement referring to the atti-
tude that has started to be clearly visible in both teachers and their students: it is 
worth trying to introduce changes in the process of teaching and learning; it is worth 
trying to break the routine. One should not be afraid of changes because they bring 
positive results.
The research enabled us to capture evolving attitudes of teachers and students 
that have been revealed under the influence of UDL approach implementation dur-
ing Polish, math and history classes. Teachers began to attach greater importance to 
making students aware of the lesson objectives, creating opportunities to differenti-
ate the ways in which they achieve lesson objectives and more frequent use of dif-
ferent forms of work. This resulted in a gradual abandonment of whole-class 
teaching in favour of teamwork with student participation. Initially, teachers felt 
discomfort caused by more easy-going atmosphere during classes and the fear of 
failing to achieve the core curriculum within the prescribed timeframe. Over time, 
however, they and the students began to feel satisfied, especially with growing 
mobilisation of students to perform, and thus their motivation and activity during 
classes. As a result of these changes, the value of change was recognised.
Teachers reported that being aware of lessons/learning objectives works well and 
makes sense. During interviews carried out after Polish, math and history classes, 
the students revealed the awareness of the practical application of the knowledge 
they learned or they mentioned its usefulness for the future. They appreciated that 
teachers at the class beginning formulated specific objectives and identified the use-
fulness of what they later learned. The teachers and students clearly stated that it 
made sense to show the practical application of knowledge and skills.
Pursuant to the UDL approach, the teachers were given guidelines for thoughtful 
application of various forms of in-class performance and expression by the students. 
This led to the situation where, in addition to the strategy and workstyle developed 
by them in parallel to professional experience acquisition, they modified both in- 
class measures and the ways of involving students in activities (projects, models, 
schemes, drawings, student work in diversified and evolving work groups). 
Recognising and appreciating the outcome of these measures, students and teachers 
started to express their satisfaction with the availability of more diverse forms of 
in-class activities and expression.
The assessment of the outcome of the UDL approach application based on the 
empirical data collected during the research also applies to the identification of fac-
tors conducive to the undertaken implementation activities.
The teachers themselves mentioned the need to extend the time to complete the 
lesson subject by means of combining two lesson hours into one block and structur-
ing students’ activities on the basis of clearly defined goals and laying down trans-
parent rules for in-class activities.
5 Transformations of the Teaching–Learning Process Towards Inclusive…

---

112
By making a generalisation of the parts discussed and identified themes and sub- 
themes in the statements of the teachers during the implementation of the research 
project, it can be concluded that the experience of teachers and students began to 
confirm the perception of the value of transforming the conventional teaching pro-
cess into the students’ learning process, understood in a constructivist manner.
This phenomenon should be noted, since it is desirable and expected not only 
due to the application of the UDL approach, but, above all, due to the recommenda-
tions for practice generated by a radical theoretical change in pedagogy, that is:
– Changes in the student’s field of activity and the teacher’s attention (a different 
area of control and self-control; orientation at the knowledge acquisition pro-
cesses, not only performance-oriented; monitoring instead of controlling, etc.)
– Changes in the content, time and space management (in place of rigid manage-
ment and an external plan, the principles of flexibility, content personalisation, 
wide availability of space and sources, etc., start to operate)
– Focus on individualisation (which turned out to be more knowledge-forming 
than collective teaching, which does not respect individual resources) (Klus- 
Sta
ńska, 
2019
, 15)
In addition to the positive reflections of teachers coming from the reflection 
about the changes they observed in the teaching–learning process, and thus, changes 
taking place in students, it was noted that barriers hampering change were per-
ceived, as well as the desire to overcome them.
Opinions formulated by teachers and reported inconveniences concerned, first 
and foremost, the time-consuming planning and class preparation according to the 
UDL rules. It was emphasised that the outcome of students’ work is not always 
equal to the teacher’s workload pertaining to class preparation. It can be assumed 
that teachers would not complain about the incommensurability of efforts and ben-
efits if they were not burdened with various extra work, including in particular work 
related to formal documentation, drawing up various types of reports, etc. They did 
not consider the fact that with the acquisition of new experience they will develop 
economic strategies for lesson development in line with the rules of the UDL 
approach.
Another barrier mentioned by them was the overbearing nature of the core cur-
riculum, that is, ministerial regulations with requirements for teachers in terms of 
the necessity to implement the core curriculum with all students within the formally 
prescribed timeframe. Additionally, the pressure from the education authorities to 
complete the whole curriculum made the impression of yet another barrier. This fact 
is indeed reflected, inter alia, in the applied external controls. The misunderstanding 
of the teacher role is another argument formulated by the teachers as evidence of 
imposing extra non-didactic duties on them. In their opinion, not only students’ 
parents but also pedagogical supervision, impose expectations on the school man-
agement and teachers that go beyond their competences, which sometimes lead to 
undermining of their profession, for example, blaming only teachers for all student 
failures. Although this phenomenon is very complex and has a broad social and 
legal context, the belief expressed by teachers, although not without validity, does 
J. Baran et al.

---

113
not take into account their attempts to limit their professional responsibility to only 
selected scopes of activities (Groenwald, 
2013
).
Teachers, referring to the expectations of their students’ parents, define another 
barrier in the implementation of the UDL approach, which is the accountability of 
teachers for their performance, pointing to the pressure exerted by parents to pre-
pare their children well for the final examinations.
The so-called examination efficiency is the nightmare of Polish schools, limiting 
the freedom of teachers to act, and forcing students to make great efforts. This phe-
nomenon is accompanied by the association of ‘educational success’ with a high 
position in the ranking, which the surveyed teachers consider as another barrier in 
UDL approach implementation. Unfortunately, the Polish educational realities have 
not yet been able to escape such a vision of student, teacher and school success. The 
rankings are common and advertised in many social media, especially in the press 
and on the Web. They are also submitted and expected in the reports to the world 
authorities.
Synthesising this part of the research project, the difficulties in teamwork shown 
by the students randomly assigned to various work groups should be pointed out. 
Their statements and behaviour during lessons show that they were willing to coop-
erate, but only in a regular community of peers. They did not like to change teams 
and could not appreciate the value of the experience of working in a new team. This 
phenomenon leads to the conclusion that students show strong inclination to stick to 
their habits of working in a permanent team and are closed to new relationships.
To this conclusion, it is worth adding the teacher’s symptomatic utterance made 
during the focus group interview:
Teacher Cecil: They (students) are thirsty for success. (Reflection with researcher, 29)